Beliavsky 2004

Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Afanassiev 2001   24  0.6650  0.0023  0.0823  0.2327  0.2113  0.22
Ashkenazy 1981   25  0.6614  0.0132  0.0831  0.1545  0.0733  0.10
Beliavsky 2004   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
BenOr 1989   15  0.6848  0.0017  0.0918  0.3160  0.0432  0.11
Biret 1990   31  0.6424  0.0025  0.0722  0.2339  0.0824  0.14
Blet 2003   52  0.6156  0.0049  0.0544  0.0555  0.0460  0.04
Block 1995   28  0.6551  0.0034  0.0547  0.0550  0.0652  0.05
Brailowsky 1960   56  0.5649  0.0060  0.0461  0.0454  0.0558  0.04
Chiu 1999   12  0.6933  0.008  0.1411  0.3937  0.1015  0.20
Clidat 1994   3  0.726  0.014  0.273  0.619  0.501  0.55
Cohen 1997   59  0.5559  0.0056  0.0460  0.0415  0.3728  0.12
Coop 1987   8  0.6937  0.0010  0.1214  0.3548  0.0622  0.14
Cortot 1951   42  0.6240  0.0051  0.0455  0.0431  0.2135  0.09
Czerny 1949   6  0.718  0.019  0.166  0.4934  0.129  0.24
Czerny 1949b   27  0.6523  0.0035  0.0736  0.0747  0.0642  0.06
Ezaki 2006   11  0.6954  0.0018  0.0921  0.2545  0.0820  0.14
Falvay 1989   13  0.6831  0.0014  0.1015  0.3443  0.0816  0.16
Ferenczy 1958   61  0.5443  0.0063  0.0640  0.0655  0.0550  0.05
Fiorentino 1962   37  0.6366  0.0042  0.1033  0.1054  0.0539  0.07
Fliere 1977   14  0.6834  0.0011  0.118  0.4353  0.0518  0.15
Fou 1978   21  0.6646  0.0024  0.0920  0.2639  0.0821  0.14
Francois 1956   60  0.5452  0.0062  0.0552  0.0540  0.0656  0.05
Hatto 1997   44  0.6230  0.0046  0.0546  0.0552  0.0549  0.05
Horowitz 1971   55  0.5720  0.0053  0.0459  0.0454  0.0463  0.04
Horowitz 1985   62  0.5119  0.0058  0.0462  0.0436  0.0941  0.06
Indjic 2001   38  0.6332  0.0039  0.0639  0.0645  0.0647  0.06
Kapell 1951   19  0.6722  0.0028  0.0719  0.2748  0.0625  0.13
Kiepura 1999   18  0.6744  0.0036  0.0737  0.0735  0.0640  0.06
Kilenyi 1937   34  0.6460  0.0026  0.0624  0.2345  0.0823  0.14
Kissin 1993   4  0.715  0.012  0.382  0.6637  0.0811  0.23
Kitain 1937   63  0.4616  0.0059  0.0363  0.0323  0.2634  0.09
Kushner 1990   39  0.6315  0.0033  0.0734  0.0740  0.0838  0.07
Levy 1951   49  0.6112  0.0143  0.0542  0.0563  0.0459  0.04
Luisada 1990   26  0.6655  0.0037  0.0735  0.0750  0.0646  0.06
Lushtak 2004   45  0.6225  0.0050  0.0458  0.0457  0.0562  0.04
Lympany 1968   47  0.6227  0.0047  0.0545  0.0558  0.0457  0.04
Magaloff 1977   9  0.6938  0.006  0.139  0.4132  0.233  0.31
Magaloff 1977b   10  0.6926  0.007  0.2010  0.3931  0.167  0.25
Magin 1975   33  0.6435  0.0044  0.0549  0.0558  0.0548  0.05
Milkina 1970   17  0.6710  0.0120  0.0817  0.3125  0.284  0.29
Mohovich 1999   22  0.664  0.0313  0.107  0.4732  0.138  0.25
Nadelmann 1956   43  0.6211  0.0121  0.0928  0.2043  0.0727  0.12
Ohlsson 1999   54  0.5847  0.0055  0.0456  0.0463  0.0365  0.03
Olejniczac 1990   35  0.6464  0.0040  0.0543  0.0556  0.0551  0.05
Olejniczak 1991   32  0.6453  0.0041  0.0738  0.0747  0.0737  0.07
Osinska 1989   5  0.7117  0.005  0.344  0.5843  0.0812  0.22
Paderewski 1912   29  0.6528  0.0015  0.1016  0.3332  0.1314  0.21
Perahia 1994   58  0.5629  0.0057  0.0551  0.0525  0.2531  0.11
Perlemuter 1986   51  0.6142  0.0048  0.0641  0.0640  0.0644  0.06
Poblocka 1999   16  0.6861  0.0027  0.0827  0.2049  0.0630  0.11
Rangell 2001   7  0.699  0.0116  0.1212  0.3651  0.0619  0.15
Risler 1920   40  0.6345  0.0029  0.0725  0.2229  0.2510  0.23
Rosen 1989   53  0.5958  0.0061  0.0553  0.0555  0.0554  0.05
Rubinstein 1939   46  0.622  0.0712  0.1029  0.1815  0.435  0.28
Rubinstein 1952   50  0.6141  0.0052  0.0457  0.0446  0.0564  0.04
Rubinstein 1966   48  0.6136  0.0045  0.0554  0.0558  0.0461  0.04
Rummel 1943   57  0.5657  0.0054  0.0550  0.0547  0.0553  0.05
Shebanova 2002   41  0.6321  0.0038  0.0548  0.0535  0.0845  0.06
Smith 1975   23  0.6639  0.0022  0.0813  0.3544  0.0717  0.16
Szpilman 1948   36  0.6413  0.0131  0.0830  0.1840  0.0729  0.11
Uninsky 1971   2  0.7218  0.003  0.195  0.5723  0.402  0.48
Wasowski 1980   30  0.653  0.0519  0.0832  0.1254  0.0536  0.08
Weissenberg 1971   20  0.667  0.0130  0.0726  0.2142  0.0726  0.12
Average   1  0.781  0.711  0.701  0.8747  0.076  0.25
Random 1    65  -0.0362  0.0065  0.0265  0.0224  0.1743  0.06
Random 2   64  -0.0165  0.0064  0.0364  0.0344  0.0466  0.03
Random 3   66  -0.0363  0.0066  0.0166  0.0121  0.2455  0.05

Note: To load data table give above into Excel, copy and paste the data into a text editor (such as WordPad) first, then copy the text in the editor and past into Excel. You should remove the "target" line from the data before pasting into Excel so that plotting graphs of the data is done properly.

Column descriptions

  • Performance:
  • 0-Rank/0-Score: 0-Score is equivalent to Pearson correlation of the entire data sequence between the reference performance and a test performance. 0-Rank is the sorting order of the 0-scores (highest score has a rank of 1).
  • 1-Rank/1-Score: 1-Score is the area fraction covered by a particular performance in the scape plot (see image above). These values should not be taken literally, since they are sensitive to the Hatto Effect.
  • 2-Rank/2-Score: 2-Score values are equivalent to 1-Score values with all higher-ranking performances removed before the calculation of the area of coverage in the scape is calculated. Improvment over the 1-Rank scores, but still somewhat sensitive to the Hatto Effect.
  • 3-Rank/3-Score: Similar to 2-Rank calculations. The bottom 1/2 of the 2-rank performances are kept constant as a noise floor for the similarity measurement. Then one-by-one the top 1/2 of the 2-rank performances are superimposed with the noise-floor performances, and a 3-score is measured as the area covered in the scape. This measure is not sentisive to the Hatto Effect.
  • 3R-Rank/3R-Score: Reverse 3-rank/3-scores. 3-rankings and scores are not symmetric (A->B values are different from B->A values). So this column represents similarity measures in the opposite direction.
  • 4-Rank/4-Score: The geometric mean between 3-scores and 3R-scores. This column gives the best overall similarity ranking between the various performances (see color codes below).
  • NED: Noise Equivalient Distance (not yet implemented)

Color codes for 3-rank listings:

  • red = strongly similar performance to target
  • orange = moderately similar performance
  • yellow = weakly similar performance
  • green = marginally similar/dissimilar performance
  • white = dissimilar to target
  • blue = false positive (has high 3-rank score but low 3R-rank score)

3-rank/scores are not symmetric, so the 3R-rank/score columns give the 3-rank/scores going in the opposite direction. More matches in the 3-rank column than in the 3R-rank column indicates an individualistic performance, while more matches in the 3R-rank column indicates a mainstream performance.

If a 3-rank and a 3R-rank are both marked as similar to each other, then there is a possible direct relation between the performances. If one is similar to the other but not in the reverse direction, then the similarity is more likely to be by chance (performers randomly chose a similar interpretation).